quote:

---

The ear is relatively forgiving of this type of clipping when it happens on an occasional basis. It is over almost as fast as it happens. But when it occurs over and over again, as it does here, the result is fatiguing. It is, after all, distortion.

Why would someone do this? The cynic would suggest that it was to make the SACD transfer more transparent-sounding than the CD transfer, with less grain and greater dynamic contrasts apparent. Maybe. However, you then have to deal with the fact that to untrained ears, "louder" is always "better," and the CD layer does indeed sound louder.

I suspect, therefore, that the work was done on the CD layer so that it didn't sound too different from the dynamically crippled norm that non-audiophiles have come to expect as "CD sound." Certainly if you do a Google search for comments on this SACD, many people have written how much they like the CD layer, describing it as having more "impact," more "punch."

But the difference negates any comparisons between the two media, at least using this recording.

---

quote:

---

... I can almost see the young EMI exec jabbing his finger at the mastering engineer and shouting, "The audiophiles have got their prissy SACD layer, now make the other one ROCK!"

So, when it came to the new DSotM re-release, they simply applied the standard sub-standard treatment.

---